Author
Topic: Was anyone rude here? (Read 12615 times)

I recently went on a first date with someone I met online. We got along quite well and I agreed to a second meeting, however over the next couple of days a few things that had slightly bothered me on the date started to bother me even more and after a bit of thought I realised that this probably wasn't someone I wanted to be in a relationship with.

Because I think it would be wrong to go on the second date knowing there wasn't a future in it when he might have been hoping there was, I cancelled it. It was by e-mail which I know some people might think is a bit off, but having met online its the main way we've communicated, we'd actually never spoken on the phone. I gave polite, non personal, non insulting reasons for cancelling, apologised and wished him well.

His reply was mainly polite, but he accused me of being disingenuous! I admit, I'm a bit put out. I don't plan on replying because there would be no point, I don't plan to have any further contact with this man, but was he rude to get personal and basically insult me, or is it understandable as a response to an unexpected rejection? Was I rude to cancel an arranged date?

No, I don't think you were rude. You changed your mind. It happens. I think it would have been ruder to go on the date and have him assume you were still interested in him. Now, he knows and neither of you wasted time.

Logged

Chicken-keeper, welder, artist, student and lover of all things literary.

I had to stop and think about this. I'm not sure either of you were rude. You said yes to a second date, thought about it and decided no. You tried to let him down easy. But seeing this from his side, it does seem 'disingenuous' - you said yes to his face, then no in an email. If that is the worst he said in his reply, I see it as him stating his feelings about the way it was handled.

Perhaps the lesson to learn is that 'perhaps' is a good answer. You then get to think about the second date idea and reply later.

I had to stop and think about this. I'm not sure either of you were rude. You said yes to a second date, thought about it and decided no. You tried to let him down easy. But seeing this from his side, it does seem 'disingenuous' - you said yes to his face, then no in an email. If that is the worst he said in his reply, I see it as him stating his feelings about the way it was handled.

Perhaps the lesson to learn is that 'perhaps' is a good answer. You then get to think about the second date idea and reply later.

That's a good point, thanks. The problem is that I felt pretty certain when I said yes in person, it was a little bit of time and detachment that helped me realise it was a no, so I did truly feel very bad about the whole thing. I'll try to remember for the future that perhaps is always better!

I had to stop and think about this. I'm not sure either of you were rude. You said yes to a second date, thought about it and decided no. You tried to let him down easy. But seeing this from his side, it does seem 'disingenuous' - you said yes to his face, then no in an email. If that is the worst he said in his reply, I see it as him stating his feelings about the way it was handled.

Perhaps the lesson to learn is that 'perhaps' is a good answer. You then get to think about the second date idea and reply later.

I disagree with this. I think it was extremely rude for this man to call the OP 'disingenuous'. That basically means sly. In fact, OP was the opposite of that. It would have been more 'disingenuous' to go on the second date, knowing it wouldn't lead anywhere. Not that that would have been wrong, either, as people are often awkward about dating in the early stages. I still think it's just as well the OP didn't go,as this man sounds like a bit of a fruitcake. OP, I think you dodged a bullet.

Logged

I have a thousand parents. Sadly theyDissolve in their own virtues and recede.

I had to stop and think about this. I'm not sure either of you were rude. You said yes to a second date, thought about it and decided no. You tried to let him down easy. But seeing this from his side, it does seem 'disingenuous' - you said yes to his face, then no in an email. If that is the worst he said in his reply, I see it as him stating his feelings about the way it was handled.

Perhaps the lesson to learn is that 'perhaps' is a good answer. You then get to think about the second date idea and reply later.

I disagree with this. I think it was extremely rude for this man to call the OP 'disingenuous'. That basically means sly. In fact, OP was the opposite of that. It would have been more 'disingenuous' to go on the second date, knowing it wouldn't lead anywhere. Not that that would have been wrong, either, as people are often awkward about d@ting in the early stages. I still think it's just as well the OP didn't go,as this man sounds like a bit of a fruitcake. OP, I think you dodged a bullet.

Thanks, I agree actually! That response in the e-mail at least made me sure I'd done the right thing not seeing him again.

I had to stop and think about this. I'm not sure either of you were rude. You said yes to a second date, thought about it and decided no. You tried to let him down easy. But seeing this from his side, it does seem 'disingenuous' - you said yes to his face, then no in an email. If that is the worst he said in his reply, I see it as him stating his feelings about the way it was handled.

Perhaps the lesson to learn is that 'perhaps' is a good answer. You then get to think about the second date idea and reply later.

I disagree with this. I think it was extremely rude for this man to call the OP 'disingenuous'. That basically means sly. In fact, OP was the opposite of that. It would have been more 'disingenuous' to go on the second date, knowing it wouldn't lead anywhere. Not that that would have been wrong, either, as people are often awkward about d@ting in the early stages. I still think it's just as well the OP didn't go,as this man sounds like a bit of a fruitcake. OP, I think you dodged a bullet.

Thanks, I agree actually! That response in the e-mail at least made me sure I'd done the right thing not seeing him again.

I'm sure you've done the right thing! Even if he felt disappointed, it was not appropriate to insult you. Even if it was 'what he fe;t at the moment' that doesn't mean he had a right to be rude. If I told everyone I knew exactly what I thought of them at all times, I would alienate a lot of people! This is quite apart from the fact that it sounds as if this man might have been investing too much into the relationship, too soon, Internet dating can be fun, but only if people don't take it too seriously. I don't mean that you (general) shouldn't look for an LTR online, just that even LTRs have to start somewhere. Having a sense of humour and balance is very important. Here endeth the lecture for today!

Logged

I have a thousand parents. Sadly theyDissolve in their own virtues and recede.

Checking my (1967) dictionary, disingenuous is 'lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity; insincere.' I still can see how he could feel she acted that way. She knows why she changed her mind; he doesn't. He just knows the 'yes', then 'no'. And not really why.

Not that I am advocating that he should be told.

And it does seem like a big word to use to say, 'What? Why the sudden switch?'

(It's Dad's old dictionary so it is loved. But online dictionaries yielded the same result.)

Checking my (1967) dictionary, disingenuous is 'lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity; insincere.' I still can see how he could feel she acted that way. She knows why she changed her mind; he doesn't. He just knows the 'yes', then 'no'. And not really why.

Not that I am advocating that he should be told.

And it does seem like a big word to use to say, 'What? Why the sudden switch?'

(It's Dad's old dictionary so it is loved. But online dictionaries yielded the same result.)

I think disingenuous implies that I didn't mean it when I said yes originally, I did, completely, so that's why it bothers me.

Logged

BettyDraper

Well, from an etiquette standpoint, we are supposed to honor social commitments once they are made, barring an actual emergency. Cold feet are not an emergency and excusing oneself by saying "really, it's kinder not to waste his time.." doesn't work, either, from a manners standpoint, even if it's pragmatic as a dating strategy.

The OP said the man's e-mail was "mostly polite" and the word 'disingenuous' isn't automatically insulting -- heck, etiquette relies on insincerity on many occasions -- so I'd call this one a draw.

Well, from an etiquette standpoint, we are supposed to honor social commitments once they are made, barring an actual emergency. Cold feet are not an emergency and excusing oneself by saying "really, it's kinder not to waste his time.." doesn't work, either, from a manners standpoint, even if it's pragmatic as a d@ting strategy.

The OP said the man's e-mail was "mostly polite" and the word 'disingenuous' isn't automatically insulting -- heck, etiquette relies on insincerity on many occasions -- so I'd call this one a draw.

Re the bolded: maybe you wouldn't be insulted by that description. I would be, and consider his response completely inappropriate. I would be tempted to send an extremely snarky email in response (which would be a very bad idea, as it escalates the situation). I'm sorry, but the situation is by no means 'a draw'. d@ting is not quite like other forms of social interaction, especially in the early stages. What the OP did was standard practice, and as I have said before, very far from disingenuous. She actually saved this man time and emotional energy, and in return, was insulted. In whose universrse is that acceptable or polite? Certainly not in mine.

ETA. Even if you consider the OP to have been rude, then he was rude in retaliation, which is unacceptable. But your 'cold feet are not an emergency' maxim does not apply in the early stages of dating. I would say that most especially in the case of women dating men, as safety is always a factor there.

« Last Edit: September 04, 2010, 05:20:10 PM by lucretia »

Logged

I have a thousand parents. Sadly theyDissolve in their own virtues and recede.

Checking my (1967) dictionary, disingenuous is 'lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity; insincere.' I still can see how he could feel she acted that way. She knows why she changed her mind; he doesn't. He just knows the 'yes', then 'no'. And not really why.

Not that I am advocating that he should be told.

And it does seem like a big word to use to say, 'What? Why the sudden switch?'

(It's Dad's old dictionary so it is loved. But online dictionaries yielded the same result.)

That isn't the point! Of course he's entitled to feel that she acted that way. (I think that any sensible person would see that was whack, but that's kind of beside the point) The point is though, it was very rude of him to express that feeling. He isn't entitled to anything from the OP, and in fact comes across as a bit of a nut. What he could have said was 'Oh, I'm sorry you didn't feel we were a good match, I felt we might have had a connection. But I wish you luck in your search, nonetheless'. Anything else is very inappropriate, and borderline creepy, for only one date. To be quite honest, I find it disturbing that women would condone creepy and controlling behaviour shown by men towards other women.

Logged

I have a thousand parents. Sadly theyDissolve in their own virtues and recede.

BettyDraper

Well, from an etiquette standpoint, we are supposed to honor social commitments once they are made, barring an actual emergency. Cold feet are not an emergency and excusing oneself by saying "really, it's kinder not to waste his time.." doesn't work, either, from a manners standpoint, even if it's pragmatic as a d@ting strategy.

The OP said the man's e-mail was "mostly polite" and the word 'disingenuous' isn't automatically insulting -- heck, etiquette relies on insincerity on many occasions -- so I'd call this one a draw.

Re the bolded: maybe you wouldn't be insulted by that description. I would be, and consider his response completely inappropriate. I would be tempted to send an extremely snarky email in response (which would be a very bad idea, as it escalates the situation). I'm sorry, but the situation is by no means 'a draw'. d@ting is not quite like other forms of social interaction, especially in the early stages. What the OP did was standard practice, and as I have said before, very far from disingenuous. She actually saved this man time and emotional energy, and in return, was insulted. In whose universrse is that acceptable or polite? Certainly not in mine.

ETA. Even if you consider the OP to have been rude, then he was rude in retaliation, which is unacceptable. But your 'cold feet are not an emergency' maxim does not apply in the early stages of d@ting. I would say that most especially in the case of women d@ting men, as safety is always a factor there.

Hey, she's the one who posted, so clearly in her mind it's not entirely as cut and dried as you portray. Further, where did she ever say her safety was in question?

She made a social engagement and then broke it. There is no getting around that and I refute that "dating is different." (Or, if it is, perhaps the rules of proper post-date correspondence are different, too, and she should expect candid feedback about her performance on the dating scene rather than polite euphemisms. You can't have it both ways.) The possible direction that a social relationship may take in the future does not "trump" the ordinary standards of social behavior in the present.

Well, from an etiquette standpoint, we are supposed to honor social commitments once they are made, barring an actual emergency. Cold feet are not an emergency and excusing oneself by saying "really, it's kinder not to waste his time.." doesn't work, either, from a manners standpoint, even if it's pragmatic as a d@ting strategy.

The OP said the man's e-mail was "mostly polite" and the word 'disingenuous' isn't automatically insulting -- heck, etiquette relies on insincerity on many occasions -- so I'd call this one a draw.

Re the bolded: maybe you wouldn't be insulted by that description. I would be, and consider his response completely inappropriate. I would be tempted to send an extremely snarky email in response (which would be a very bad idea, as it escalates the situation). I'm sorry, but the situation is by no means 'a draw'. d@ting is not quite like other forms of social interaction, especially in the early stages. What the OP did was standard practice, and as I have said before, very far from disingenuous. She actually saved this man time and emotional energy, and in return, was insulted. In whose universrse is that acceptable or polite? Certainly not in mine.

ETA. Even if you consider the OP to have been rude, then he was rude in retaliation, which is unacceptable. But your 'cold feet are not an emergency' maxim does not apply in the early stages of d@ting. I would say that most especially in the case of women d@ting men, as safety is always a factor there.

Hey, she's the one who posted, so clearly in her mind it's not entirely as cut and dried as you portray. Further, where did she ever say her safety was in question?

She made a social engagement and then broke it. There is no getting around that and I refute that "d@ting is different." (Or, if it is, perhaps the rules of proper post-date correspondence are different, too, and she should expect candid feedback about her performance on the d@ting scene rather than polite euphemisms. You can't have it both ways.) The possible direction that a social rel@tionship may take in the future does not "trump" the ordinary standards of social behavior in the present.

My first reaction was to feel insulted and I was also tempted to fire back an e-mail explaining exactly why I didn't want the second date (if he can make assertions about my character there are plenty I can make about his!) but I took a deep breath and ignored it, realising that wouldn't do anybody any good.

Surely it would have been even more 'insincere', if not technically rude, to go along for a second date knowing I was only doing it because I felt obliged?

Could I have been more upfront in my reasons for not wanting to see him again? I assumed that with 'polite euphemism' most people would read between the lines and realise that its actually "I just don't like you enough' but less brutal.